The Sun. — London, England, 1864-04-08 00:00:00

TFIE STN LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, APRIL 8, 1864, and I will include in my statement of exports of British, the exports of foreign and colonial produce, of which this country is becoming more and more the centre. In the year 1861 our imports were estimated at £217,485,024. In 1562 they were estimated at £225,716,976 ; and in 1863, the year when we were almost wholly deprived of the largest and most valuable of all our imports—namely, the cotton of America—the imports were estimated at £248,980,942. Our exports of British produce stood for the first of those three years at £125,102,514 for the second of three years a t £123,992,2151 ; and for 1863 they stood at £116,489,768. Oar exports of foreign and colonial produce for the first year were £34,529,684; for the second year £42,175,`170; and for the third year 519,485,005. The total exports of the country were, in 1861, £159,632,498; in 1862, £166,168,134; and in 1863, £195,974,773. The total movement of the foreign trade of the country is this Imports and exports, taken together, amounted in 1861 to £377,117,522; in 1862, £391,885,110; and in 1863, L 144,955,715. That astonishing sum I will only illustrate by these two statements. In the first place, it may be taken to be about three times the trade of this Country as it stood at a period comparatively recent, viz., in the year 1842, when Parliament first began deliberately and advisedly to set itself to work with a view to reform our commercial legislation. (Cheers.) In the second place, that sum may be taken to represent as nearly as possible £1,500,000 for every day in the year —a magnitude of operations connected with industry so vast that, if it did not stand on incontrovertible figures, it would hardly receive belief. But not only are these figures remarkable when we consider them as showing the progress of the energies of Englishmen, and the strength of that country which is dear to all our hearts, but they mean much more than this. They mean that England is becoming more and snore deeply pledged from year to year to be the cham• pion of peace and justice throughout the world—to take vart, with no view to narrow and selfish interests, but to act with the broad object of the welfare of humanity at large, in every question which arises, in whatever part of the globe. (Cheers.) I referred a moment a g o to the year 1842, and stated that it was since 1842, since the commencement of the great work of Parliament with regard to commercial legislation, that these changes had taken place. Ido not overlook for a moment the effect of other elements that have been at work—elements of immense power and immense ad • vantage. There are some who think the same effects would have been produced, even if your commercial legislation had remained as it was. (Hear, hear, from an Hon. Member— laughter.) I hear a solitary "hear, hear." It is a matter of great national and public interest that we should satisfy ourselves in some degree by approximate evidence of the truth of this statement. Ido not deny that other countries have made great progress in trade and industry. I do not undervalue the effect of the powers of locomotion which leave been set in operation amongst us. There are many other causes which have co-operated to produce this extra ordinary development of modern industry; but this I have observed, and it will at any rate go for what it is worth, that during the several years in which Parliament has with an unsparing hand addressed itself to the business of libe -1 acing commerce, these operations have been immediately- R e llowed by striking augmentations of the trade and indus try of the country. Whatever is due to locomotion, to tele graphs, the progress of machinery, the change has been equal from year to year. Allowance must always be made for good harvests and bad harvests, but still if I find this taeet ing me in examination of the case that the legislation of Parliament has immediately been followed by striking and great results, it shows me that we have not been feeding ourselves on empty dreams when we believed that in ,giving freedom to the commerce and capital of England e were adopting the true means of extending our pro sperity. I will only take the three last years in which changes of that kind have taken place. In 1853 important changes of that description were made. The exports of Bri tish produce in 1853 had been £78,066,000. The year 1852 was a. year of great prosperity, an excellent harvest, and of the cheapest capital ever known in this country. 1853 was a year of bad harvest, but a year of legislation on behalf of freedom of trade; and while in 1852 the exports were £78,000, 700, those of 1853 were £98,938,000. The yearlB6o was one , of the worst harvests known during the last half century; and in that year the exports showed an increase of £161,010 on the preceding year. In 1863 it was in the power of Parliament to grant extensive measures of com. mercial relief. In the previous year, 1862, the exports were £166,168,000 ; but in 1863 they rose to £ 195,974,000. Ido not think it is possible to lay down any precise rule or de gree ; but I do say these figures represent a connection be tween the years of legislation and the great increase of the trade of the country. I will now refer to the fiscal and com mercial legislation during the same years to show that we have not been indifferent to the complaints of those who think they have been hardly dealt with. And, first of all, let me refer to the completely settled—l mean settled so far as legislation is concerned—question of the paper duty. Though the accounts which I shall present are fragmentary and partial, they are indisputable, so far as they go. There la's been an increase of imports to tho following extent ; lA. 1359 it was 13,0 Ce cwt, and in 1861, 191,000 cwt, which wax an enormous increase. W hen we consider the import of the materials of paper, we find that in 1.859 we imported 178,000 cwt, and in 1864, 72.5,000 cwt. There is a positive increase in the amount of British paper goods exported. In 1859 it reached 115,000 cwt, and in 1864, 190,000 cwt. Thix is the quantify as nearly as can be estimated, but of the quality I cannot speak, Then conies the question of the price, and this has been greatly reduced. We will take printing papers; and in 1859 the price was Gld to Sid per lb; 1864 it was 4id to 61d—(hear, hear)—so that the re daction has been from 7to 9 farthings per pound. There is another very curious fact connected with the paper trade, though I am very far from representing that the paper trade is as prosperous es one could desire to see. (near, hoar.) It is remarkable that the diminution in the number of paper manufactories which was taking place before the repeal of the duties has ceased. In 1838 the number of paper manu• factories was 526, of whom it is necessary to deduct a small per contago for the card-board trade. In 1848 there were 447; in 1833, 386 ; in 1859, 385 ; and in 1861, when the duty was repealed, the number had sunk to 364. In 1363 it was 360, though these had been labouring under considerable disadvantages; for the paper trade was in no small degree dependent upon the cotton trade. And you must recollect, with respect to the value of cotton goods exported, the cot ton had vastly increased in price ; therefore the total value of the exports, as compared with other years, may tend to diminish the appearance of loss. But this high-priced class of cotton goods required no more paper to pack them than did the cotton which was formerly sold at a cheap rate. Ihe papermakers have also suffered with respect to rags. I must ask the house to remember that the cotton trade grew up under protection. Protection immersed the energies of the manufacturers, and they were contented with imperfect and wasteful methods of manufacture. But protection was with drawn, and it was said that it would cause considerable suf fering to throw the manufacturers upon the resources of their invention and skill. The restorative process com menced, and, after a short interval, every on:of the branches of this trade found itself more healthy, more vigorous, and more profitable. (Applause.) I will quote a single instance in the paper trade in support of what I have said. The facts are supplied to me by a gentleman in the trade, who is a partner in a mill which was set up since the repeal of the duties, I am not authorised to 1133 this gentleman's name, but if his facts should be doubted he is willing to communicate the particulars. For the four months ending Oct, 31, 1863, he made paper at £57 per ton, but it did not pay. Ile and his partner set themselves to work for the purpose of seeing what could be done by the improvements of the process and by chemical agency. In Oct., 1863, as I have said, he produced paper at £57, and in December he had his partner had reduced the price to £47 per ton. (Hear, hear.) At the present moment they are manufacturing it at £37 per ton—(applause)—and the arti cle is a better one than that which cost £57 per ton. I think it would be ill advice to them if they were told not to de pend upon their own energies. It is certainly monstrous to say to any branch of British industry that we shall ex pose them to the effects of foreign competition unless we likewise say " You shall have all your wants at home sup plied on the best possible terms." (Hear, hear.) We very much lament that foreign Governments should maintain restrictions of any kind on the imports of raw material. It is with great satisfaction that I am authorised to say that we hope and believe that a concession will be made by the Government of France in the export duty on rags. (Hear.) I neat come to the question of spirit duties, the importance of which will be remembered when I say that, not from strong liquors taken in the whole, but from the single arti cle of what is called ardent spirits, we raise nearly one-fifth of the entire revenue. In 1860 the duties were raised to the highest point, viz., I.os the gallon, and it was said that, although there would be a considerable diminution in the e s nsumption, yet from the augmentation of duty there would be an increase of revenue. The duty was not so g r a e s at , u as e Was expected, bat the question arises whether that was due to smuggling, to distress, or to the operation of the duty. "With respect to the duties of the year 1859-60, the revenue department ex plains that there was a large sum received in consequence of what may bo called the premature delivery of spirits f rom bond, under the expectation that the duties wsuld be increased in February, 1860. The effect was that £320,000 duty was received, and went to the estimate of the year 1859-60, which really he longed to 1360.61. Th e actual revenue for 1859-60 must be estimated for as follow s : First we must deduct from the duly then received on British spirits a aura of £340,000 ; a 8012 of 225,000 , and, secondly , in consequence of the great diminution that in the year 1 359-60 was enacted by Perlis went on the dut y in foreign Spirits, and particular l y on French brandy. The corrected total of the revenue for foreign, colonial, and British spirits in 1859.0 for the pur pose o f comparison with the revenue of th e present y ear , w o uld stand as follow s : £11,706,000 ; namely, on British spirits, x 9,458,000; on foreign, £2,293,000 ; making £11,756,000. In 1860.61 it was £12,168,000; in 1861.2 it was £12,267,000; and in 1862-3, when the Lancashire dis tress had reached its utmost intensity, it fell to £12,102,000. In 1863-4, when the distress had been abated, it rose to £12,638,000. So that the real state of the question, con si I ered as a final question, is as follows : The revenue, 1859- 1160, properly belonging to it, may bo taken as £11,756,000 ; in 1863-61 , £12,638,000 ; showing an increase in therevenue from spirits of £332,000. This being a question of great interest, I have sought for means of throwing light upon it. 'Why is it that the revenue from spirits has not risen. Is it duo to smuggling, to distress, or to a change of taste' It is not owing to smuggling. I think the evidence on that subject is clear. It is quite true that in Ireland at this moment there is an increase of smuggling as compared with the three preceding years; but it is not tine that there is an increase in smuggling as compared with what it was when the duty was Ss. I will venture to give a proof of that. We have means of judging whether distress has operated in this matter or not, becaeee the circum stances of the three countries, as connected with consuming power, have materially differed during the last four years. Ireland has unhappily been afflicted with a succession of bad harvests. Better in 1863, not perhaps as regards the seller, but as regards the consumer ; but the three preceding harvests were of an exceedingly lamentably defective cha racter. England has suffered in the great focus of consump tion of this kind, viz., in Lancashire, in a peculiar degree. Scotland, having a very small cotton trade and having its industry generally in a flourishing condition, may be said to have hardly suffered at all, Now it is curious that the spirit revenue of the three countries has varied in the precise pro portion of their distress. In England the revenue has been stationary since 1859-60. It was £1,341,000 then. In 1863-4 it was £4,390,000, showing an increase of £49,000, or about 1 per cent. on the revenue. In Ireland, where the pressure of distress is greatest, in 1859-60 the revenue was £2,655,000. In 1863-61 it sunk to £2,322,000—a decrease of about 14 per cent, on the whole, which is amply accounted for not only by the gradual change of taste which operates in all the three countries, but also by the special distress under which Ireland laboured. In Scotland, where the pressure of the distress has been much less felt, the Scotch revenue from spirits has increased in a manner not at all unsatisfac tory, considering the changes which have been made in it. In 1859-60, even although unduly swelled by premature de liveries, it was £2,973,000, and in 1863, £3,332,000—(hear) —showing an increase of upwards of £300,000. This may be considered a very satisfactory result. The truth is, a very great change of taste is going forward. It is not to be indicated by one circumstance or another, but by the com parison in aggregate effects of a multitude of observations. There is a steady process, a very happy process, in operation —the translation of taste for stronger and more ardent spirits to milder and more wholesome liquors ; and we cannot un derstand what is going on with regard to the spirit duty, unless we keep that essentially in view. lam glad, how ever, to say that, as far as regards distillers, though they have had a considerable diminution of home demands, an export trade is rapidly creating itself. Some 20 years ago the quantity exported was very trifling. In 1859 it had risen to 1,911,000 gallons; while in 1863 it had risen to 4,071,000 gallons. lam informed that the Scotch, in addition to a tolerably supply which they have found for the people of Scotland, have secured to themselves a considerable portion of this export trade. With respect to wine the figures stand as follows : In 1859 wine imported from Portugal was 2,106,000 gallons; in 1864, 2,669,000 gallons, showing an increase of somewhat over 25 per cent. Tho wine imported from Spain is more in favour than the Portuguese wine ; for in 1859 it was 2,884,000 gallons, and in 1864 it had risen to 4,799,000 gallons, or about 70 per cent. The wine imported from France in 18.59—the last year before the change—was 597,000 gallons, and in 1864, 1,965,000 gallons—showing an increase of 330 per cent. As regards other foreign countries, which are generally represented by light wines, the amount in 1859 was 577,000 gallons, and in 1864, 1,184,000 gallons, or over 100 per cent. The im port of colonial wine has largely decreased, distinctly proving that nothing but a duty perfectly artificial and extravagant in amount, and totally unreasonable in its grounds of endowment, in effect taken out of the pockets of the people of England, was really the basis of the trade in colonial wines. If the wine trade will grow natu rally in the colonies, by all means let it do so ; but I believe, in those colonies whose climate was best suited to the growth of wine, the rate of labour is a rod deal too high to allow anyone to hire a large number of persons to set about the manufacture. The growth of the consumption of wines in thin country is most satisfactory. In 1858-59 it was 6,974,000 gallons ; and in 1863-64, 10,729,000 gallons, showing an increase of 54 per cent. The figures for 1863-61 are not precisely as regards units or hundreds of gallons, but for every substantial purpose they are correct. There is another subject I wish to mention to the committee, because it was a subject of legislation last year, and also is a subject of great fiscal and eonsiderable commercial importance—l mean the subject of the tobacco duties. During the last year an act was passed for the purpose of reconstructing our system with regard to duties and , rawbacks on manufactured tobacco. The objects of the act were to diminish smuggling and to increase trade and revenue. I think the committee will be of opinion that where those objects can be satisfactorily combined, the results are well worth having. As regards the increase of articles which were formerly smuggled, the case stands as follows—The descriptions of tobacco which were largely smuggled into the country were cigars and cavendish. The cigars imported in the eleven months from April up to February, 1863, was 2,316,0001 b. The cigars imported in the corresponding period of eleven months in 1863-64 was 3,976,0001 b., showing a large increase. With respect to cavendish, the manufacture of which in this cenntry had been previously prohibited, but which was allowed by the Act of last year to be manufactured in band, six menu , factories of cavendish have been established by way of a commencement of the trade. But this in crease of importation of the foreign article has not been attended with a duninution of the tobacco manufacture at home; for, whereas it appears that in 1863 there was entered for coesutnption 35,700,0001 b of raw tobacco, in 1861, after the duty had been lowered ani the British manufacturer had been put through his usual paroxysm of apprehension and alarm— after the usual an nouncement lead gone forth that many hundreds of thou sands cf workmen in the tobacco trade were about to be dis missed, if they had not been actually put upon the streets-- now what are the facts of the case ? In the year preceding the change, the British manufactured tobacco entered for home consumption before this terrible and pernicious change was 36,569,000 lbs. ; and whereas in 1862-63, in the eleven months, we only exported 50,000 lbs., in 1863 64, for the same period, we exported 120,000 lbs. The reverse, I am happy to say, has been going on in a very satisfactory manner. About 1843 it was ad mitted that the smuggler had got the better of the re venue department ; but his triumph, if it was really a triumph, was only temporary. The smuggler has been kept within bounds, and, I trust, now is not only kept within bounds, but greatly limited and reduced. The ave rage annual growth of the income of this country from to bacco alone for the twenty-one years, beginning with 1842 and ending in 1862, has been £105,000 a year. Last year, when t he change of duty was adopted, the revenue rose from £105,000 to £29),000. (Cheers.) The house may desire to know what is the condition of our trade with France. In the year 1859, immediately after the treaty of commerce, our imports from that country were £16,870,000. In the year 1861 they had risen to £24,024,000. Our exports to that country during the year 18.59 were £9,561,000. In the year 1863 they had risen to £22,963,000. But I am very glad to say that the French manufacturers, like the English, are begin ning to find the futility of their alarms, just as the traders in this country found it in their own case many times over ; and that at this moment the spinners of France, who were in a state of dire apprehension when the hon. member for Roch dale was executing his work, have become exporters of linen yarn, and have sent to Dundee cargoes of that commodity amounting to half a million sterling in value. (Hear.) With all this I remind the house that the pauperism of this country remains not only stationary—l exclude Lancashire as a matter of temporary operation—but may now be said to have been for a considerable number of years on the decrease. In 1848-49 the paupers of this country num bered 931,000 ; in 1863-61 they were 828,000, without including Lancashire. In 1848-49 there were 61 paupers in every thousand of the population, and now there are only 46 in a thousand. In other words, in the first of those years there were 239 in every thousand who were a working population, and now there ate 951 in every thousand who are a working and a self-supporting popu lation. That is the state of the case as regards the year 1863-4, through which we have just passed. New I come to the estimates for the year 1864-5. (Hear.) The charge for the funded and unfunded debt may be taken as £26,400,000, The increase which appears in this charge is owing to the operation of the measure to which I recently referred for converting perpetual into terminable annuities. The charges upon the Consolidated Fund other than that debt are £1,930,000. The estimates for the army are £14,844,000. The estimates for the navy are £10,432,000, but they will probably be subjected to a certain amount — not a large amount—of increase on account of a planwhick is under consideration for improving the position of various classes of officers in the navy. The estimates for the collec tion of the revenue are £4,692,000. The packet estimates are £633,000. The miscellaneous estimates may be taken for the present purpose at £7,628,000. It is probable that that will not ultimately be the precise figure, but I may observe that I have reserved a sum of ;CBO,OOO to cover any variation which may occur in the navy and miscellaneous estimates. The total estimated expenditure of the country will therefore stand for the year 1864-5 at £66,890,000, That is lower than the estimated expenditure of 1863-4 by £1,393,000, and lower than the actual expenditure of that year by £166,000, but, it is higher than the estimated expen diture of 1858-59, which was the lest year before we come to the years of very high expenditure, £2,226,000. Or if we correct the comparieon by debiting ourselves with the amount of the long, annuities which we have saved, and likewise with the fortification expenditure, but deduct the sum of 4 025,000 on the other side, to which I have referred as now appearing on bath sides of the account, and which did not appear in 1853.59, the incre ase since 18e8-59 may be taken as £1,017,000. lam anxious to draw the atten tion of the committee to that figure because I think it is a fair estimate of the actual present remaining growth of our expenditure since the time when we returned from the Russian war to a peace establishment. And now I come to the e stimates of the revenue for the year. First, I take the revenue from the customs as £23,150,030 ; second, excise, £18,030,000; third, stamps, £9,320,000; fourth, taxes, £3,350,000; fifth, income tax, £3,600,000; sixth, Post office, £3,950,000; seventh, Crown Lands, £310,000. That is the whole of the revenue properly do called, Eigth, miscellaneous receipts, estimated at £2,250,00 0 ; ninth, indemnities, £6'00,000, of which £500,000 is from China and £lOO,OOO, in two Burns, received from Japan. The total estimated income will, therefore, be £69,460,000, and the total estimated charges £66,899,000 ; and the pro bable surplus of income over expenditure will be £2,570,000. There are several minor subjects, which have no great bearing on the revenue, but which I may as well mention to the committee in the first instance, in order to put them out of the way of the more material ques tion as to how the surplus is to be dealt with. Perhaps the committee may be surprised when I say it is intended to submit to the Houses of Parliament a proposal for altering the present duty upon corn. The duty on corn is at present levied by measure, while almost all transactions connected with the foreign corn trade are carried on by weight. In consequence of this discrepancy, and the inconvenience re sulting from it, the merchants connected with the corn trade —I think 12 months ago—made representations to the Go vernment that the form of duty ought to be altered. We propose accordingly to alter the duty from the uniform rate of one shilling a quarter, to a uniform rate of threepence per cwt. This change will take effect immediately on the passing of the Act. It is also proposed to put some articles of very small importance—such as lentils—which now pay no duty, on the footing of corn. That has been done at the request of the trade. But, sir, I ought to mention that it has been proposed by many persons connected with the trade to modify the duty in this way—to lay a duty of 3d, per cwt. on wheat, and 21. per cwt. on other kinds of grain. And it is very justly said that that would be a more fair arrangement in reference to the value of the article on which the duty is imposed. Now, there are two reasons which have withheld the Government from acceding to that view of the case. One is that the change would entail a considerable loss to the exchequer, which we do not think that, having a pressure of other claims, we are in a condition to afford. The other objection is this, that it would appear as if we were deliberately setting about the construction of a regular system of corn duties, and as if we regarded that item as a permanent portion of our finance. When the corn duty was imposed in 1846, it was imposed under the idea of its being a nominal source of revenue. It has, however, pro duced considerable revenue, with which it might be dif ficult to part. lam not prepared to say that it should be parted with at the present moment ; but I confess that, on the other hand, I should be reluctant to commit myself to any plan which appeared to assume that a duty of this kind —not a heavy duty, but still more than a nominal one—is to be regarded as permanently imposed upon the chief article of subsistence. I propose to make a change in the rate of the charge for the licences of dealers in tea in cer tain cases. It is well known that these licences, in some cases, operate severely in the rural districts, where the deal ings of the shopkeepers in each particular branch of trade are very small ; and they are obliged to combine a great number of branches in order to constitute a business that will yield a competent and moderate return. At present no person can sell a pound of tea without paying the sum of Ils 6d for a licence. That sum of Ils6d is reckoned to be 10 per cent, on the sale of from 30 to 35 pounds of tea in the year. That tends to narrow the supply of this commodity, especially to the rural population. It is not felt as a griev ance in the towns. I think it is good policy, even taking no higher ground, in furtherance of the great change which we adopted last year, to make a reduction upon that duty with reference to the thinly populated districts. I therefore propose in all houses under £lO a year rating, and not being in a minicipal or parliamentary borough, to reduce the duty I from lls Gd to 2s Gd. That would cause a loss to the re veoue of £lO,OOO. Two years ago we adopted useful regu lations with regard to hawkers. We legislated for hawkers on foot and for hawkers having one horse. We reduced the duty from to £4; but we forgot the case of the hawker who had two horses. (Laughter.) The result is that at the present moment a hawker who has two horses pays £4 on one, and £8 on the other. We propose to place both horses on the same footing. (Renewed laughter.) We propose the equalisation of the stamp duties which are now payable upon admission to ecclesiastical benefices of small value. At present there is a distinction in the rates of charge in the case of rectories, vicarages, and perpetual curacies. There is no ground for the distinction. We propose, there fore, to abolish it, and substitute for the scale now in force —which would levy a payment of £7 upon presentation and institution together to benefices of £3OO a year—a scale of duties which will bring the charge to £5 in the case of bene fices under £3OO a year, and which would diminish as the value of the living decreased ; so that a living of less annual value than £5O would be altogether free from charge. Next, sir, I willingly accede to the hon. member for Devizes the proposal he has suggested, which proposal is founded on good sense; it is, that the duty on proxies to vote at joint stock companies, which at present is 61, but which was formerly 30s, shall be reduced from 6d to id. I pro pose certain reductions upon the duty on letters of attorney for the receipt of dividends, and I proi ose to make a change in the stamp duties with regard to the sale and transfer of the stock of foreign companies. I propose to legalise the practice known as marine reinsurances upon payment of 10 stamp, as in the case of fire insurance. I propose, under the same control of the magistrates, to give to refreshment-houses and sellers at the bar the benefit of occasional licence, as far as it is enjoyed by pub licans. lam silent on the question of charities this year; but I wish to remind the committee that there is no change in our views, and certain directions have been given by the Home Secretary for the purpose of collecting informal ion, which will be laid before Parliament, to enable it to form a s)und judgment when its attention will again be drawn to the subject (Hear, hear.) Therefore, with the insigni fiCant exception of £10,050, the surplus will stand nearly at its original amount. Now as regards the disposal of the actual surplus of £2,500,000. (Hear, hear.) This year has brought forward a large number of formidable claimants ; but I shall endeavour to deal fairly with such cases as can not be possibly passed over, With regard to the largest portion I will not keep the committee in suspense. I don't think, when the matter is considered apart from prejudice, interest, promise, or pledge, there can be any doubt that the first claim upon the surplus is the claim of sugar. I need scarcely remind the committee of the enormous importance of that article. I believe its importance, as regards the comforts of the people, stands next to corn. The duty on sugar was raised for the purposes of war, and the principal part of the impost was never removed, We now propose to make a considerable reduction in the sugar duties. At present sugars are 10s. above the price of 1863, and they are Gs. above the price of 1861 and 1862. There is no com parison between the claims of tea and sugar. With regard to tea, we are dependent upon one source of supply, and we are the great emsumers of the world, and exceed all other consumers in a large degree; whereas, in the article of sugar, our consumption is small with reference to the total consumption of the world. Sugar is produced in a mul titude of countries and is sent into a multitude of markets; and the consequence is that if it is diminished in price it will have the effect of attracting it to the highest mar kets, and, therefore, mitigating whatever inconvenience may be felt from a restricted consumption. The stock offers by no means a satisfactory prospect. On the last day of February, 1562, the stock of sugar was 707,000 cwts. ; on the last day of February, 1863, it was 238,000 cwts.; and in 1864 it was 227,000 cwts. But now I approach the most formidable part of my task this even ing. I said I proposed to deal with the sugar duty, but how is it to be dealt with ? There arises a question which is grave in two senses. The question whether sugar is to be taxed with a uniform or a classified duty is one of great im portance to all who are interested in its cultivation ; but, on the other hand, as regards details, it abounds in every ele ment of repulsiveness. The present classified duty upon sugar is approved by some, while it is a scandal and offence to many more. The system of a uniform duty became gra dually modified until the markets were opened to all the sugars of the world; but we found we had to deal with classes of sugar of which very little was previously known. In the year 1841 the consumption of sugar was 7lbs. per head of the population. In the year 1851 there was a change consequent upon free trade, and the consumption had risen to a - Tbs. per head. In the year 1861, after being ten years under the operation of the classified system—but when we had not the power to give the boon to the consu mer which was given in the ten years between 1841 and 1851—the consumption per head was 3511b5. ; and in 1863 consumptionthe rose to 35;lba. per head of the population. Referring to the influence of authority, I may say that the literature upon this question has been enormous. (Hear.) Up to within the last fortnight, I believe I may conscien tiously say that I kept myself on a level with the press of the country. So far as the sugar duties are concerned in the last fortnight, however, my efforts have been baffled. (Renewed laughter.) But upon the subject of authority, passing from the opinion of political economists, I may re mind the committee that a select committee was appointed upon the motion of the member for the City of London, two years ago, under the presidency of my right hon. friend the Secretary for the Colonies, and that the report of that com mittee, after a most patient investigation was distinctly in favour of the present system of classification. Nor is that all. Last year we had what may be called an international dis cussion upon this subject. Representatives from the customs departments of England, France, Belgium, and Holland, met in Paris and discussed the subject; and not only did the representative of England find no reason to recede from the system of this country, but the representatives of France and Holland came to the conclusion that they would do well to abandon the system of an uniform duty. As far, therefore as authority is concerned, we have ample in favour of classification. But it is said classification means protec tion; and there is another argument, drawn from the analogy of the mode in which we have dealt with other articles, No doubt Parliament did impose duties upon dif ferent descriptions of tea; and it abandoned that system not because it came to the conclusion that the principle was false, but because we found from the nature of the commo dity that the arrangement was impracticable. And now is it true that a system of uniformi'y is the system recognised throughout our tariff ? lam happy to say that our tariff has now reached very moderate dimensions ; nevertheless instances may be set forth, almost all of which are in favour of classification. There are the wine duties for example. Again, refer to the case of coffee. When coffee comes over here in the raw state it pays 3d ; when roasted it pays 4d. Cocoa, when it comes here as a pure raw material, you tax d in the lb ; when it comes removed from the husk you tax it Id ; and when it comes in the more advanced stage of chocolate you tax it 20 in the lb. Take the case of corn. The duty on corn is now is a quarter, but you are going to make the tax 3d a cwt. Well, what is the duty upon flour, which may be said to be corn refined ?—why, 4id per cwt. Lastly, take the case of wood. Wood pays a duty of is a load, but if sawn into deals it pays 2s. Therefore, so far as the analogy of our tariff goes, it is in favour of classification• But now to refer to the plans which have been proposed re specting the sugar duties. I know the committee has a peculiar aversion to dealing with any question where three courses are open to us—(laughter)—but this is a question in which not three, but four, courses are before us. (Renewed laughter.) The plans are these. One is to have two rates of duty—one upon refined sugar, and the other upon unrefined. But refined and unrefined are not the only categories with which we have to deal ; because refined and unrefined are both of them solid sugars. There is also that which I may call liquid sugar, which comes under the class of melado or molasses ; and there are those who say let us have one duty for refined, and another duty for unre fined solid sugar, and a third duty for liquid sugar. An other plan is to have one rate of duty only for refined and unrefined, and another for liquid sugar. A third plan is to have one rate of duty for solid and liquid sugars ; and the fourth is the system of classification, based upon an appro• ximation to the value of the article. Now, it appears to me that the advocates of a uniform duty have not a leg to stand upon, and therefore I utterly reject the proposals founded upon that view. In the same way I reject the dis tinction between solid and liquid sugars. In the contest between the importer and the revenue it would be impos sible to maintain any such principle of distinction. The question really is between uniform duties and classified duties. Ido not contend that the present scale is a perfect one. Indeed, the select committee to which I have referred, pointed out that it operated inequitably in two respects. In the first place it is almost prohibitory as regards the lowest descriptions of sugar ; and, in the second place, it operates severely upon the higher descriptions of unrefined sugar which come from the Mauritius and the East Indies. I put mile all question of refining in bond, for that is not open to us as a practical question. The proposition which I lay down, and which I invite the committee to accept, is this, that the form of our duty should be that which should least interfere with the natural course of trade. I have no hesi tation in saying that I adopt the doctrine laid down by the Manchester Chamber of Commerce, and which has been accepted also by the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce I received the other day an address from Manchester on the subject of the sugar duties. The memorialists expressed their opinion that the duty should be in proportion to the amount of crystalisable sacccarine matter which the sugar contained. (Hear, hear.) Now, let me try it by example. And here I must use one of those outlandish barbarous words, " jaggery," which moans the lowest class of sugar manufactured in tho East Indies, Lot us suppose 2 cwt. of this sugar in the market in the East Indies, and that these 2 cwt, contain 50 per cent., not of saccharine matter, because in saccharine matter it will not differ very much from much better sugars, but of what is called " crys tallisable saccharine matter," as the Manchester Chamber of Commerce has very properly described it, which can pro fitably be extracted by the refiner, 2 cwt of that class will yield 1 cwt for duty. Ido not refer to the minor results of refining, which would only complicate the case very much. I take only the first process, that is, just as it comes from the cane and undergoes the first process ; and the question is, how are we to adjust our law in such a way that we shall give no inducement to any man, by means of the duty, to refine in England rather than in India, or in India rather than in England ? That, I think, is a fair statement of the ease. What will the Indian refiner do? Let us suppose we have an uniform duty. That is the way, we are told, to do justice and avoid protection. Let us look at the operation. The Indian refiner buys the 2 cwt and refines them. He sends them to this country, and if the duty in this country is lOs per cwt, he pays lOs for the introduction of his 100 lb of refined sugar. What has the British refiner to do ? He buys 2 cwt in India at the same rate as the Indian refiner ; he sends it at a greater expense to England—but that is his affair, not ours; we must not undertake to reimburse him for that—he brings it here to refine, and he pays 20e upon the 2 cwt : so that the English refiner pays a 20s duty to get his sugar into the market, while the Indian gets it in for lOs. And yet we are told that is the way to do justice and so avoid the stigma of protection. We have endeavoured to consider the question entirely without prejudice, but there is no doubt at all what the meaning of that operation would be—that it would be simply equivalent to a bounty of lOs on refining in India. And this might happen : it might be that in India, in consequence of the dearness of skilled labour and the dearness of capital and machinery, refining might cost 5s per cwt more than in England, and still it might be worth while to get sugar refined in India rather than to send it to be refined in England, because of the lOs fine imposed by the fiscal laws here. That is the nature of the view we take. We aro not willing to give any premium on the employment of labour and capital in England as compared with India : but certainly we are not willing to impose a penalty upon the employ ment of labour and capital in England, which is in our view the effect of the duty. We have resolved to amend the duty on the principle laid down in the memorial of the Man chester Chamber of Commerce. Now, I will explain my proposals. The present duty on sugars—rejecting for a moment the consideration of the semi-liquid classes, is dis tributed amongst four classes ; refined 18s, 4d.; equal to white clay, 16s. ; equal to brown clay, 13s. 10d. ; rnusco • vado, or not equal to crown clay, 12s. Sd. I must mention Dutch numbers—which may he speaking in a foreign tongue to society in England, but which are the only universal language of the sugar trade of the entire world ; and if you tell a man what a duty is in Dutch numbers, it is constru able in the tongue of every foreign country, and he knows exactly upon what quality of sugar the duty will fall. The refined sugar corresponds with the Dutch No. 20, which is the highest of them. The 16s. duty, or equal to white clay, corresponds with Dutch Nos. 15 to 18 ; the 13s. 10d. duty corresponds with Nos. 11 to 14 ; the 12s. 8d , or not equal to brown clay, corresponds with Nos. from 7 to 10; and nothing under 7 can possibly pay the duty which we now impose. We have had to consider whether it is desirable for us to alter essentially the dividing points between these classes. There are four classes, and therefore throe divid ing points. These dividing points do not rest upon any abstract principle, but upon knowledge and experience, and are well understood here and all over the world. Therefore, we have thought it very undesirable to recast the duty iet tots, and to establish a complete's , new state of distinction. Consequently we adhere to these dividing points between the different classes now establi,hed ; but we meet the grievance in the better class of refined sugars by diminish ing the interval of duty at the upper end of the scale; and we meet the grievance in the lower class by establishing a new class, at a lower rate of duty than the rest, for the pur pose of making those sugars admissible which are now pro hibited. The drawbacks, of course, will have to be altered in proportion to the duties; and I should say also, in regard to a collateral point of some importance, that, to make this change fair as regards the refiner, we shall pro pose to postpone the reduction of duty on foreign refined sugar to four weeks from the present day, We hope, if the committee shall be disposed to accede to our proposal, and think it reasonable to proceed this day week with the resolution relating to sugar, then on Saturday week the new law will be in actual operation. I will now read the new scale. Refined sugar, instead of 18s 4d, will be 12s 10d ; the second class, or eaual to white clay, instead of 16s, will be Ils Sd ; the third, or equal to brown clay, instead of 13s 10d, will be lOs 6d ; the fourth, not equal to brown clay, instead of 12s 3d will be 9s 4d , and a new ch as of in ferior sugars, corresponding with Dutch numbers not rising above No, 6, to be 8s 2d; the duty on rnelado and molasses will follow in proportion, the duty on the former for 6s 7d, and on the latter 3s 6d. The effect of this I will describe as well as I can. The interval between brown clay and re fined, the chief subject of complaint, ie so great that it cer tainly does destroy and divert the natural course of trade. It is now 4s Gd ; we reduce it to 2s 4d. The fitth class pro vides for the lowest classes of sugar. The smallest reduction made is 3s 4d, the largest 5a Gd, the average is over 4s. The effect of this change will be to place the sugar duty in this country Is—or more than ls—dower than it ever reached in any former year. (Cheers.) We shall propose to make this act permanent, and to leave the tea duty renewable from year to year. I will show the committee what will be the financial result of this plan. (Hear, hear.) The revenue from sugar for the year 1864-5, as we estimate it, will be £.(3,555,000. The reduction of the duty, as 1 have stated, would cause a first loss of £1,71 9 , 000 ; but allowing for the entry of sugars now practically excluded, and taking credit for increase of consumption amounting to 6 per cent, which I consider a very moderate estimate, £361,000 of that sum would be recovered, and the loss t o the revenue in 12 months would be £1,358,000. But allowing for the fraction of the year that has already passed, the probable net loss will be £1,330,000, and that at once, as the house will see, reduces my surplus from £2,56',00, to £1,230,000. So much for the sugar duties, upon which it has been necessary for me to enter rather fully in order to mak e m y self intelligible to the house. I now come to a subject which it is impossible for her Majesty's Government, whether their view of it may be, to pass by without notice, uncler the circum stances of the day—l mean the demand which is made for the reduction or repeal of the malt duty—because that is a subject of great importance. (Hear, hear.) It involves a re venue of £6,000,000. A reduction of one-half would in the first instance involve nearly twice as much as the large re duction I have just proposed for the sugar duties ; and I can b asin business s h highly h this l house,omp e- not disguise, and do not disgui se, that is a question of great political importance. A great victory has recently been won itne compe tent notertf o o t n d l n y h t i o r e take. (L hisug (Laughter.) r share.) Ai ngentleman, the but even to adorn this house, has, as I am informed, failed to obtain a seat in Parliament because he was not ready to accede to the demand for the repeal of the malt tax. (A laugh) The successful candidate saw no difficulty in his way, and on the list of his committee appeared a name moat justly respected in this house--tho name of a person of great political influence—the name of my right hon. friend the inm etnahebeirltfeorAHchneritnfoisrtdrsahtiiorge,. anTd S he e g c u re e t s a ti r o y n fo t r hen th i e C s,h ol a o s taies the remission of the malt tax a claim upon our remaining sur poSedt o a g u l g v h e tteiri to .) It s h the commonly repeal plus? Is the house disposed the malt duties ? (No, no, and l said that if we reduce the malt duty by one-half there will be little or no loss. But practically one half the malt duty was taken off when the beer duty was removed. Thirty-four years have elapsed since the beer duty was removed, but although during the last year the malt duty raised £700,000 more than in the year before, the malt duty has not yet supplied the loss of the beer duty. For in 1829 the joint produce of the beer and malt duties was £7,286,006, while last year the malt duties only produced £s,o9l,ooo—the average produce of the malt duties during the last few years being 5i millions—whilst after 35 years have elapsed from the time when practically half the malt duty was taken off, there is still a gap of 11 millions not filled up. If then you chooSe to take the step which you are asked to take, you may tell your little Children no ,rowing up that the longest lived amongst them may wiineee the reeovery of the malt duty, but pray give up any hope of seeing if ' yourself. What, indeed, is the great grievance of the growers of barley in this country ? The grower of fine barley, who possess a practical monopoly, ha s no grievance at all. During the 25 years when the duty was levied by the sliding scale, from 1827 to 1846, the average price of barley was 32s 6d per quarter; for the 17 years since the repeal of the sliding scale, it has been 43s 111 d. But that is not all, for while there has been a rise in the price of all barleys, there has been a special and peculiar rise in the price of the good barleys, and growers of which are now so obstre perous for relief. But it is time, air, that the question should be looked at from another point of view. When the member for Hertford proposes to sacrifice some millions on account of the malt tax, let us consider how this bears upon the interests of the three countries, England, Scotland, and Ireland, and how the remission would be divided amongst them. At present, if I take the revenue from spirits and malt together, I find that England pays £10,218,000, or 10s a head; Scotland, £3,620,000, or 22s a head ; and Ireland, £2,653,000, or lOs a head. What would be the effect of taking five millions or three millions off the malt tax ? It would be a boon to England to be made up by general taxes on the three kingdoms. Scotland and Ireland would obtain almost no part of the relief, but would be liable to pay their fair share of any augmented income tax or other tax which might be imposed. (Cheers.) The malt duty paid in Eng land during the financial year just expired was £5,722,000 ; in Scotlanl, £263,000 ; in Ireland, £306,000. (Hear.) Under these circumstances, the Government, not insensible to the evils of a system of excise as applied to any manufac ture, have come to the conclusion that they would betray their duty to the country, under the circumstances in which we stand, if they proposed to apply any part of the surplus to the reduction of the malt tax. (Cheers.) Now, there is another question which it is my duty to bring to the notice of the house—the income tax; for this is a ques tion not only involving the largest amount of revenue on which it is in the power of a Minister to address Par liament, but it is in other respects the most important, because it is associated with the strength and security of the country in times of emergency in a manner which belongs to no other tax whatever, and in volves social relations touching the relations of class to class, and their relative susceptibility to taxation, and moral questions concerning the effect of certain schedules, which are of a moment far transcending those which bear on ordinary questions of taxation, It appears to me that the country should bo dealt with fairly and openly on the subject of the income tax. Parliament should consider — Will it maintain the income tax on its present level—abolish it altogether—reduce it to a lower level--regard it as an in strument of ordinary finance—or, declining to employ it in time of peace, reserve it for great national emergencies, ex • cept as a means of effecting further reforms in our fiscal system ? Those questions have never been decided by Par liament. In 1812 the income tax was imposed to facilitate commercial reforms—in 1815 it was renewed with a view to still further commercial reforms—in 1849 it was renewed on the proposition of my right hon. friend the Secretary of State for India, in a time of considerable apprehension, although not of actual danger. In 1851 Parliament refused to renew it, except after the appointment of a parliamentary commit tee. In 1853 it was renewed for the longest period for which Parliament has ever granted it, but it was renewed upon a statement of figures and calculations which appeared to afford a reasonable promise of its extinction. In 1860 it was renewed, and even raised, to meet the necessities of the country, in connection with our establishments. and like wise with a view to carry still further the work of commer cial reform. Since 1860, Parliament has taken no distinctive resolution on any question of policy connected with it. The tax being now reduced to 7d. in the pound, we find our selves at the point where we were in 1812. These are questions on which Parliament ought to have an opinion. It is not desirable that they should be disposed of in the dark, or that the income tax should be continually dealt with simply by renewals from twelvemonth to twelvemonth, founded perhaps on, and sufficiently justified by, the exi gencies of the moment, but having no reference to policy announced to the country, and to a clear, distinct, and decided opinion on the part of Parliament with respect to the proper use of that great tax. There are, no doubt, many arguments which tend very much in favour of the permanent maintenance of the income tax, even as a matter of ordinary revenue. Its efficiency is enormous. Ido not know any other tax by which, in the same degree as by the income tax, you got at the vast reserved capital of this country. You get it by the income tax—a tax very rough and unequal, subject to that mysterious process of almost virtual self-assessment which refers it pretty nethey to ;he conscience of the taxpayer, in the great majority of eases, to determine what precise payment shall be made. But still, after all, they are got at by better means than by any other engine of taxation. But there is, as the house is well aware, much harshness in the mode in which he income tax ope rates upon the lower incomes which it affects. That opera tion has been much mitigated by the measure adopted last year. There is no doubt that those who desire the perma nent maintenance of the income tax have reason to congra tulate themselves on the adoption of that measure, which very greatly relieves the harshness of the tax in the lower part of the region in which it acts. But it is still severe upon persons dependent upon small fixed incomes—upon what may be called the non-elastic incomes of the people. It imposes undoubtedly a very great amount of trouble in the assessment. It has often been my business in this house to perform the invidious task of deprecating the complaints of honourable members with respect to the vexatious annoy ance which it involves. That is not because Ido not sym • pathise with those complaint's, because 1 know how much annoyance and trouble is inseparable from the ordinary operations of the tax, especially at the triennial period, when the assessments on certain portions of the community is schedule A arc to be renewed. The inquisition into pri• vate affairs is a serious matter in connection with the in come tax. The use of a war tax in tilae of peace—of a por tion of your last resource—is a matter which, if for no other reason, deserves the notice of the house. The opinion of the inequality and injustice of the tax, of which the hon. member for Buckingham (Mr. Hubbard) is the champion in this house, though her Majesty's Government do not accede to it, they cannot deny to be an opinion which is widely spread among a large class of people. (Hear, hear.) There is no doubt that this a matter to be considered with reference to any tax whatever. It is needless to enter into the subject of fraud. It is said, and I am afraid it would be difficult to deny, that the extent to which encouragement is given to it is very great. But there is one operation of the income tax which I cannot help—though it is matter only of private opinion—frankly stating to the house. It is its operation with regard to public economy. (Hear.) That is a topic which I do not think has been fully, or indeed ever, discussed before Parliament. Long experience in the office I hold, necessitating my placing myself in conflict at all times of day and night, and in all places and all circum stances with every sort of demand for increased public ex penditure, has brought me, after long observation, to the conclusion, that it is the desire of the house to re-establish in public ',administration those principles of reasonable thrift—l do not speak of wholesale retrenchment, in which I have little faith, but those principles of reasonable thrift which directed the Government of this country from about the period of the Duke of Wellington's Administration down to the Russian war—if they are to be re-established in administration, I greatly doubt whether it can be done if the income tax is a permanent portion of the fiscal system of this country, with a view to satisfy, not any particular exigencies nor to work out great reforms, but with a view to satisfy the ordinary every-day expenses of the country. (Hear.) After stating that it may be said, " But why all this talk about economy ? have you not stated the wealth of the country, the growth of the revenue, the enormous extension of our trade. ?" Yes, I have ; but I hold this opinion as a matter of principle, that public economy re mains just as much a duty of this house as before its great work of commercial legislation—before we reaped the bene fit of railways—before the country had achieved the vast material, and I hope likewise the great social and moral progress, of which we have had the happiness to be wit• nesses. (Hear, hear.) lam afraid it must be said of this country, " You have had, you still have, and you always will have, an enormous mass of pauperism." We have 840,000 dependent on the poor rates; but that does not in clude the numbers which are relieved by private charity, though not driven to the hard receseity of that last resort, the poor law or the workhouse, That is a large mass of pauperism; but think of the large number of poor who are bordering on that region ; think of the multitudes of the labouring classes who struggle manfully, but who with difficulty avoid it. I saw recently a clergyman of the East end of London, who told me, " I have 13,000 people, of whom 12,000 are for ever on the verge of destitution." I read last week a letter from one of the best known philan thropists of this country, in which he described the state of the whole district at the East-end of London, where you could not find a cab or an omnibus, where there was not any street music, and not even a street beggar. What are we to say of the peasantry of this country ? Happily, much has been done in many places, where their wages have much increased, but in many places they have not increased. What are we to say of the duty of public economy when we think of the population of Ireland ? Human lite, in nine Cases out of ten, is a struggle for existence ; and if the means for carrying on that struggle are somewhat bettered, yet the standard of wants has risen equally with the stan dard of means. In respect to public economy, we have, independent of general arguments, that which we gave two years ago upon the motion of my noble friend at the head of the Government, in which he very wisely asserted the prin ciple that " this house, deeply impressed with the necessity of economy in every department of the State, but at the same time mindful of its obligations to provide for the. security of the country at home and the protection of its interests abroad, observes with satisfaction the decrease which bas already been effected in national expenditure, and trusts that such further diminution will be made therein as the state of circumstances mey permit." That is the relative situation of the Government with respect to taxation. After all I have said, I certainly am not one who ought to propose a policy relating to the income tax reaching over a long term of years. I have been sufficiently warned of the dangers of propositions of that kind. We ask the house to adopt no general conclusion on the subject of f- the income tax. We do not propose a plan to abolish it. spirits and free trade t'n cultivation,. I ving it to the farmer We do not propose that the committee should pledge it- to produce as he pleas( ,d barley, or lie' or tobacco. . ro plaincd of t he tone in wh ich the self to its abolition as a p olie s . That which we do propose Mr. BENTINCK c is this—that we should adopt as a policy its reduction, as right hon. gentleman (IVIr. Glaletone. ) had spoken of pr circumstances may permit, to that which was once its legal tection. (Hear, hear, end laughter. He also contended Miniterem ; anti that we should now p rocee d t o t a k e the first that there ought to be a reduction in the malt tax, and of the two etepe which would bring us to that legal mini- prophesied that the first strong la °cerement which came mum. (Cheers.) The proposal is to take off one penny from into office would re-ente ct tire duty t paper. (Laughter.) the Chancellor of the the income tax. (Cheers.) Ent if we can reach the standard Mr. CAIRD remons l / 4 `rated with of 5d on the income tax, that would establish a position in Exchequer on his pre.pose'l to impos , 3 a duty on certain in which Parliament would have it in its Power to consider de- ferior descriptions ot corn, wh ch we re principally used in liberately and upon principle what course it should pursue. feeding stock and the purposes of dist, 'nation. Now, sir, we propose to make a reduction in the tax to 6d. rho CHANCEL LOtt. of the EXC !EQUER then rose The ultimate loss would be £1,230,000, and the immediate to reply. He said his proposal with respect to the d escrip loss will be £BOO,OOO. The case of schedule B—l may say of tion of corn referred to by the hon. member (Mr. Caird) ecotland and of Ireland—will be dealt with precisely in the was tam atter on whi res ch olu all parties ith should be fully hen rd, and manner It was dealt with by the act of 1853. £400,000 of tha in passing the w regard to it, th e come the loss will be postponed, and the sUrplus, which began at mittee would not be bound to an y final judgment, While £2,570,000, will be reduced to £434,000. But there is yet admitting that he had reas tD be dissatisfied W ith the another subject. In consequence of the indications—the genera l t o ne of the discussion, he. would observe that he formal indications —given by the house, we havo thought it s hould infinitely prefer to see the flees insurance duty stand our duty, limited as our means are, to consider whether we altogether than reduce it by so sms .11 a proportion its 6d., could submit a measure which would indicate our desire to With regard to a staters ent made by an hon. biro . let (Sir meet with deference anti respect the convictions that are J. Ferguson) respecting the income tax, the rig ht hon. entertained by the House of Commons, even when we do gentleman reminded the . committee tie( et last year, when be not entirely and absolutely share them. I advert, sir, to the submitted taxes of 7d and 0, the figure, he cave t he, house fire insurance duty. (uheers.) We do not think we should were about £3,000,000. He re ow gave 70, and his estimate have been justified in entertaining a large proposition with was still £4,600.000, founded on the ac charg es known respect 'o fire insurance dut ies, to the dis p lacement of either from the general re-assessment which hed taken 'place. In of the proposals which have made; nor are we prepared to reply to the remarks of an hon. gentlem in resee , :ting illicit accede—and I trust the committee will not ask us to accede distillation, he wasillation prep had nut ared to show, wil l re g ar aud to gmentati Ireland, —to any such proposal. H ow does the case of the fire in- that dist resulted f n on surance stand ? The amount cf it is £1,700,0e0. and it of the spirit duty. As to the paper duty,. since he spoke he i n creases at the rate of about. £.50,000 a year. Now , he re had had We opportunity of seein g , in a paper laid on the again we are met with this difficulty. There is the greatest table of the leouee, that the export duty on rags would be possible diff e rence of opinion with respect to what I may removed by the. French Governmeiat. (Hear, lee er.) The call the self• recovering power of the fire insurance duty in right hon. gentleenan concluded by moving that the chair' the event of a reduction. I must say, for my own part, man report progr&e. that lam not very sanguine, at least as re g ards the The motion was agreed to, and the house neutere d. JAPAN. greater part of that duty. Upon examinin g the duty, ,in into committee of enapply on t he it will be obvious to the committee that it divides On the motion for gg itself into two portions. One portion of it, the army estimates, larger portion, is a tax upon property; the remaining and Colonel SYKES inquired whether provisit n had been smaller portion is a tax upon industry and trade. Two made in the Estimates for the charge of certain troops thirds of it may bo said to be levied on buildings and furni- transferred from the Indian establishment for service in tare—that is a tax upon property; one-third, as nearly as China or Japan, accompanying the inquiry by a rather long it is possible to make a conjectural estimate, is levied upon disquisition upon transactions in Japan. what may be called stoek-in-trade: Now, my hon. friend Mr. H. BERKELEY called attention to, th e inferior the member for Bradford, in connection w , th an im p ortant armament of the Volunteer Artil Forceand asked deputation from the Chamber of Commerce of that town, whether any steps had been taken or were likely soon expressed publicly to me a short time ago a strong opinion to be taken, to arm the Volunteer Artillery in the same that, as regards stock-in-trade, so far as his observation manier as the Royal Artillery. went, with reference to those bra.nches of commerce with Mr. H. VERNEY moved a resolution, that it is ex which he is connected, a reduction of the fire insurance d u ty p e di e nt tie at the recommendations contained in the report would be followed by a rapid recovery. Undoubtedly I go, o f the ce enneittee on the proper means for the instruction thus far with him, I admit it to be a general rule that and emplo venent of soldiers and their children in trades, taxes upon trade, industry, and labour, when they are re- and of the tinder -Secretary of State in a letter to the duced, recover rapidly; but taxes laid upon property, when Quartermastee'-General, dated May 23, 1862, be carried they are reduced, recover slowly. We have se..n that in the into effect, with due regard to the duties and discipline of case of the assessed taxes and in other instances ; the solu- the army. tion of which is, that taxes upon property, are in the main The Marquis of 11ARTINGTON, i somen his reply to Colonel paid by the rich. They do not feel seriously or sensibl y for S y kes, said he was la bteurng under misapprehension Sion, respecti he observed tha t ng which he gave a n the most part the burden of those taxes, and when removed on the subject of his pica their proceedings are not materially affected. New, sir, explanation. In ans wer te Mr. Berkeley we have felt that if this question is in dispute as to the self- the Volunteer Artillery were ' not intended to act generally recovering power of the fire insurance duty, it would be very in the field, but were raised a. lmost exclusively to serve as desirable to endeavour to arrive at some solution of it b y the garrison artillery, and they hat.' all that was necessary to trial of an experiment, and therefore the proposal we make teach gun drill. In regard to the resolution of the ion moved by Sir to Parliament is to reduce the duty from 3 s to is 6d, so far H. Verney, he explained the intentions military as stock-in-trade is concerned. (Hear, hear.) We shall authorities on the subject. then see what the energy of commerce will effect with re- Sir H. VERNEY withdrew his m oS!.on. spect to this particular portion. We have felt that there is The remaining orders of the day were then proceeded something invidious in the present position of the duty on with, when certain bills were forwarded, and the house ade farm stock with reference to stock-in-trade. They are really journed frt 20 minutes to 12 o'clock. essentially the same thing, and they ought to have been traced in the same manner. We do not propose to impose a duty upon farm stock. I think that exemption was unfairly granted when the duty on the sto&-in-trade was retained. (Hear, hear.) At the same time, we are not prepared to propose that the duty should be reimp. sed, but we are glad to mitigate the inequality of the reduction of one-half. Of course this will not take effect uutii the Act passes. We propose it should take effect from the Ist of July, and it will be necessary to introduce a provision with respect to the return of duty upon altered policies which would, of course, be at the lower rate. The finan cial result will be this. The proceeds of the fire insurance duty upon stock-in-trade is £566,000. The first loss by reduction will be £283,000; but, as it will only operate for nine months, the loss will be £213,000. I allow for an in crease of 10 per cent„ which would be £21,000 ; net loss for 1861-5, £192,000. Now the committee will see that I have got to the full end of my tether. (A laugh.) Tho surplus, before deductions, was £2,570,000. The proposed changes, and the reiiet by them, are as follows. The relief would be : On sugar, £1,719,000 ; on income. tax £300,000 ; en flee insurance, £213,000 ; and on tea licences, £15,000 ; making a total of £2,717,000. There will be a farther loss in 1865 6 on sugar of £:8,000 ; on income-tax of £433,000 ; on fire insurances of £70,000; making a total of £531,000. The financial loss on which I must reckon in the present year, namely, 1861-5, would be, on sugar, £1,330,000; on incomeetex, £800,000; on fire insurances, £192,000; and on tea licences, £1Q,000; making a total loss of £2,332,000. The relief from taxes in this year will be greatly augmented by the enactments of last year. Tho relief from taxation which would operate this year is made of f,747,000, which we now invite you to adopt,and of £998,.000 handed over to us from the remissions of 1863, making in all a total relief for 1861-5 of £3,615,000. The loss by the changes I have proposed being £2,332,000, the surplus, after these deduc tions, is £238,000. (dear, hear.) It has grown "fine by degrees and beautifully less," and I am sure I need not say to the committee that that is not a surplus upon which we ' could possibly contemplate making any further operations. (Hear, hear.) The plan of the changes we have proposed, we have proposed in the discharge of our responsibility, and not at all as being of opinion that they ought to be or can be com pared in point of magnitude as regards the remissions with some former periods ; but they are, as we think, contributions towards the accomplishment of the great purposes which Parliament hes taken in hand ; and taken as the proposals of a particular year, they may, perhaps, be just like the stone that is cast by the passing traveller upon the heap. Each separate contribution is small, but the general result is that a heap of them arises, which becomes enough to commemorate some signal action or the death of a great man. It is in that sense we submit them to Par liament. We believe them to be good. We trust they will meet with your acceptance, and that you will concede them to be a pledge on our part of out earnest desire to co• operate with the Legislature in carrying yet further forwards those purposes the partial accomplishment of which has already done so much for the strength and security of England— for the comfort and happinelss of the people—for the honour of the age in which we live—and for the hopes that we en tertain on behalf of the times that are yet to come. (Loud cheers ) The right hon. gentleman whose statement occu pied precisely three hours ita its delivery, then placed in the chairman's hands the resolution for the alteration of the duty on corn. Mr. CR AWFORD thought the statement which had just been made would give general satisfaction to the country. The sugar duties were not levied in a satisfactory manner, and he should be prepared to move a mode for the settle• ment of those duties, which would be at variance with the proposition submitted, Mr. CAVE said, with reference to the licences upon beer houses, he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would give some other definition of those who were to be excluded from the benefit of the change proposed. Mr. HUBBARD expressed his regret at what had been announced respecting fire insurances. Sir J. FE RGUSSON having offered a few observatiois upon the surplus, Mr. WHITE said he shared the satisfaction of the house with the Chancellor of the Exchequer's statement, The results of free trade policy ware certainly marvellous. He deprecated and deplored, however, the reduction upon the income tax, seeing that a much more advantageous policy could be pursued by lessening the cost of those articles which were so largely consumed by the working classes. Mr. DUNLOP thought that, upon consideration, the member for the City of London would scarcely bring in any measure at variance with what had been stated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer respecting the sugar duties. Mr. WHITES' OE criticised the policy which had been pursued by the Chancellor of the Exchequer concerning the spirit duties. The increase in the rate of duty had pro duced the reverse of a good effect. It had caused an increase in adulteration. He understood from an eminent distiller that, though pure spirits were sent out by the distillers, a great deal of it was adulterated before being sold in conse quence of the high duties. In the first place it was watered, then treacle was added , and it was s t rengthened by vitriol. Thi s dangerous and unpleasant compound was called Glad stone's Cordial. (Laughter.) In the course of further re marks upon the ill effects of the increase of the duty upon spirits the hon. member said he believed there never was a time when the illicit distillation of spirits was so rife in Ire land as at the present time; and it was a very remarkable fact that wherever there was an illicit still there was bonism. (Hear, hear.) lie thought the right hon. gentle man should act up to his policy, and restore the duties to what they were in 18b8. Mr. MERRITT intimated that, notwithstanding what had fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer in regard to malt, he should persevere with the motion of which he had given notice on that subject. Mr. KINNAIRD regretted any trader should be speci ally oppressed by taxation, but in the case of spirits there were high moral considerations why the duty should not be reduced. Lord C. HAMILTON, on the other hand, urged that a high duty led to illicit distillation, and observed that, for himself, he should have been rejoiced if any reduction could have been made in that branch of the revenue. Mr. N ORRIS suggested further and more equitable alte ration in the beer licences, and that the gigantic joint stock companies which were every day springing into existence might be made to contribute to the exigencies of the State. In regard to the importation of rags, the Chancellor of the Exchequer was wrong in supposing that the quantity re presented by the Board of Trade returns as having been im ported within the last 18 months were for the purpose of paper manufacture. The fact Was that the cloth manufac turers of Yorkshire and Lancashire we:e so pressed for ma ' terial that they now imported the refuse woollen cloths of the Continent, and rewrought them into new material. Mr, MiM AHON advocated a reduction, in the duty on COUNTRY MARKETS. BIRMINGHAM—THURSDAY. There was a full supply of wheat to-day, and English sorts met a retail sale at rather below previous quotations. Foreign wheat is cheaper. Fine barley dearer; secondary unsaleable. Oats ani beans witnout change in \ mlue, but In more demand. Peas only taken in retail, and as dear. —English wheat was sold at 40s to 46s for white, and 36. to 43s per 36 stone for red. Barley, new malting . , 30s is 38s per qr ; grinding, 24s to 28s Oats, old, 22s to 300 per 30 stone; Irish, 18s to 245. Beans, 31s to 40s per qrs Peas, 32s to 42s per 36 stone. BURTON. ON..TIZ ENT—THURSDAY. Old white wheat..4ss to 47s j 01d red wheat ' ..40s to 4 30 New do. 44s to 47s I iNew do. ..38s to 42s Malting barley....33s to 37s Oats los to 28s Grinding d0.....28s to 30s I Beaus 36s to 4'.41 MANCHESTER _THURSDAY. A limited attendance at our rnarKet to-day, end wheat very dull, and prices the turn in favour of buyers for both► English and foreign. Flour more pressed for sale, and 6d per sack lower in price. Oats and oatmeal were dull, at about former rates. English beans rather adv ancto to value, and Egyptian ruled firm. Indian corn unchange d in price. BRISTOL—THURSDAY. English wheat met with a slow demand th.'s morning. of about the currency of this day week. Foreil,•n met with au exceedingly dull eale, and prices were is lower. Fore malting barley higher prices were aeked, which cliecked the sale ; grinding sorts in limited sale, and unaltered in prico. 0a63. more in favour. Beans and peas 6d to is lower, and Indian corn quite as dear, with a fair demand. EDINBURGH GRAIN-APRIL 6. Today there was a fair supply of wheat, which met /I slow sale at rather under last week's prices. Barley we a ready sale at is advance on former rates. Beans a rcodY sale, and about is more money. Oats sold slowly. Wheat on the top is 6d up ..average is lld up. Barley on the top 5s Od down average is lld down. Oats on the top 006 d down.... average Os 9d down. Beans on the top 3s 9d up. average 3s 9cl Average Prices. Wheat 3 0 8 ld Oats l 9:t 9a I Barley 3''s Od B eans 333 Ad Total Supply and Sales. Wheat ...1015 qrs Sold 623 qrs 8ar1ey........ 8.53 qrs Sold 751 qrs Oats Beans l7B qrs Sold 204 qrs Flour sells as follows :—Whites, 39s Od; extras, 378 Od , superfine, 35s Od ; fine, 33s Od. Foreign Mail Packet List. MAILS DUE. Australia and Mauritius, via Southampton .. A pr il lEi , • via Marseilles .. Apri l 12 ' Orazil and Cape Yards, by British packet. flay 4.9 Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. Helena.. Apri l '' ') 2 . China, Penang, and 'Singapore, via Southampton. April 10. via Marseilles ...April l'; Falkland Islands Gibraltar, via Southampton * 0 *SOO Apri ladle (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southampton.. April I . s via Marseilles.... April 1 India (Bombay), via Southampton April 11 via Marseilles April a• P0rtuga1.......... May 4. , lalta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton April 11. 5 via Marseilles Newfoundland )porto and Vigo U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet.... Apr il by U.S. packet.... _ '1 5 by Canadian packet..Apriil iv .i.,. W.C. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneritto Ap r Bahamas, via New York May . Q Nlexico. . 111 parts of West Indies, including Chili, Peru, I April 13 California. and BritiNh Columbia. [ADVERTISEMENT.]—Consumption, all nervous, bilione, liver, and stomach complaints, is every stage, are only ' 4 ; gravated and accelerated by drugs of every description, bu perfecay curable by Du Barry's health restoring lievale ns 7 Arabica Food, as proved by thousands of cases which 06 : been considered hopeless. We quote a few.—Cure No. 62,9 i; Miss Lange, 18 years of age, cured after the medical men pa ; abandoned all hopes of her recovery from the last stage pulmonary consumption, with fearful cough, expectorati on. exhaustion, spitting of blood, perspirations, hollow chee ks. emaciated to a skeleton. She is now, thank God, a perfec t ! ' healthy, bloomin , l, fleshy Lange, Commisbaire Police. Cure, No. 46,270. Mr. James Roberts, of lorirsia; Surrey, of thirty years' diseased lungs, spitting of blood, li c z e , derangement, and partial deafness.—Cure, No. 47,121. 1" Elizabeth Jacobs, of extreme nervousness, indigestloll4o. gatherings, low spirits, and nervous fancies.—Cure , 54,816. the Rev. James P. Campbell, Fakenham, Nortoot, of indigestion and torpidity of the liver, which had resist.v4, e all medical reatment. In tins, llb, 2s 9d; 21b, ls 6cl; 5 ; 7. lls ; 121 b, 228; 241 b, 40s. Barry du Barry and Co.. 14 ° .11 ftegent-street, London ; also Fortnum and Mason; s". grocers and chemists in every town of the United King"' Births. BEA,UMONT.—On the 6th inst., at 144, Piccadilly-terra°. Ladyarare Beaumont, of a son. felt HAnnoßD. M On g the t 6ch inst., at West Harling Norfolk, the wife of the Hon. and Rev, John liar" — of a daughter. RICARDO.—On the 6th inst., at Gatcombe. Minchinonn" ton, the wife of Henry David Ricardo, Esq., of a VII' Marriages. FORBE S—MoNcntErrE —On the sth inst., a t Perth , f Forbes, Esq ., eldest eon of Sir Charles Forbes, Plll' I 1:0 ' Newe to Helen, the second daughter of Sir Thorna3— Lady Louisa Moncrieffe. IVES—TALBOT —On the ith inst at Malahide, geeviilobit Ives, Esq., Royal Horse Guards". seco nd son of J• 11 Ives, Esq., of Bentworth Hall, 'Hampshire, to the bot da Susan Anne Talbot, eldest daughter of Lor d T6l Malahide, Malahide Castle, co, Dublin. Deaths. BUCHANAN —On the sth inst., at Cawdor House, shire, Thomas Buchanan, Esq. vio , erleY DIION.—Oa the 4th inst., at Hackney, Fredk• - Dixon, Esq., M.D., aged 50. KINGIN.—On the sth inst ,at 15, Royal-parade, Cheites ham, John Kingan, Ee.q . ., aged 93. „h e ater/ NEILD •—On the 4th inst., at the Town Hall, 1 ,18 17,,,, t i0a, suddenly, William Neild, Esq., High Lawn' I''' . senior Alderman of Manchester, aged 76. ThOlV° Sporm —On the 3d inst., at Richmond, Surrey' Spong, Eeq , aged 85. crescent' WAr Esq.' t j rs.—On the sth inst., at 2, Blenheim-n,ed sington-park, W., Alaric Alexander Watt s, 68. , r , it E ,1" $t Londcn: Prin.',3d and Prb.llshed by WILLIA3I A''''''-112. of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at Tun SUN OW NO. of Strand. , Li th- Precinct of the 3avoy. n the Co' Mi). 4 1 ,,, eN —Friday. Arril 8. 11361,